India giving couples cash to postpone having babies

[Nomenclature]

To be frank aging demographics only matter in a democracy where the retirees can vote out the government and destroy the economy by demanding huge pensions.

China won't collapse even if it's late with reversing one-child because they can simply let the old people die with minimal benefits. Being a totalitarian government they can cut benefits to minimal any time they want. It doesn't take a lot to keep a person alive. And old people aren't likely to revolt or stage a Tiananmen. This is probably their plan, let the old people die off, and if I was leader of China I would seriously consider it. It would be a permanent reduction in population.

Aging demographics isn't just more seniors though. The other side of the coin is a thinning number of young people, which does not bode well for the economy.

And I think you're overestimating Chinese government's power to control. The day they decide to cut benefits to minimal is the day they'll be overthrown.

 

[below_freezing]

To be frank aging demographics only matter in a democracy where the retirees can vote out the government and destroy the economy by demanding huge pensions.

China won't collapse even if it's late with reversing one-child because they can simply let the old people die with minimal benefits. Being a totalitarian government they can cut benefits to minimal any time they want. It doesn't take a lot to keep a person alive. And old people aren't likely to revolt or stage a Tiananmen. This is probably their plan, let the old people die off, and if I was leader of China I would seriously consider it. It would be a permanent reduction in population.

The problem is, most old people in China already only get 300-1000 per month from the government anyways, depending on their job before retirement. They are supported by their children, and it will lead to decreased consumption if the old have their benefits cut, which will result in economic stagnation. can the government ban giving money to old people? of course not, it's a cultural thing, and even if it were to happen, how would they implement it? cameras everywhere with police to monitor transactions between those below 60 and those above? Britain has a far higher per capita of surveillance cameras than china does (something like 1 camera:14 people, vs. 1 camera: 40000 for us), maybe they're looking to implement something like this, but not us. troll elsewhere.

 

[oceanx]

I don't know why the leadership is not revoking it. I remember listening to a record of an ANU panel discussion on China, and one expert expressed his utmost puzzlement why the Chinese government is not scraping the policy since the demographic forecast is one of the most reliable branch of social sciences and all forecasts are saying China is on its way to a demographic disaster.

Maybe it has something to do with lobbying efforts from the family planning departments in various levels of Chinese government. Those people make their living from murdering Chinese babies and you can expect them doing best they can to keep their jobs.

I for one am not wholly convinced about the validity of such forecast that "if birthrate declines to below x.x" then the population will go into an irreversible tail spin, with no hope of recovery ever ...

Our single-celled cousins on petri dishes beg to differ, and how did "Adam and Eve" populate the larger dish called earth in the first place anyway?

The English took over their peasants' land and herded them to settle overseas and in the process industrialized. The Russians liquidated their peasantry and in the process industrialized.

For other countries it may be through wars of existential proportions to "expend the surplus" while industrializing (Germany/Japan), or the resources blessed by the Almighty (Gulf states), or early and resolute adoption of sound policies in an environment of peace and overall "industriousness" while piggying back on Uncle Sam (small countries include those "Asian Tigers" and some South American states), or exercising the virtue of patience, hard work while keeping heads above neighborhood insanities (Turkey), or by a combination of the above (Europe in general) that they achieve the transition from a rural-based economy to something a little more "modern".

How do the 600 to 800 million Chinese peasants have a chance if the city population is growing and city slickers fight over menial jobs with them? "Eugenics" considerations aside, the city dwellers have to make some "Lebensraum" for the improvished country folk.

To me personally, rightly or wrongly, in the intermediate term, loosening Hukou is more important than forsaking population control measures.

 

[Nahraf]

The one child policy is good for the world if we also keep the gender balance. The 7 billion population is too much and if we can reduce it to 3 billion by keeping birth rate down then it would be good for the earth. We have shared this planet with other species for billions of years of evolution and now humans want to monopolize by grabbing all the resources. Humans are poisoning the earth with pollution and low population could be the answer.

 

[Kyusuibu Honbu]

This is good,hope radical measures like compulsory sterilization programs forced on UP people by Sanjay Gandhi don't come happen.

Just not possible for India to tell its people how many kids to have. The people will never stand it and no government can survive such a decision. Manmohan Singh is no Deng Xiaopeng. The only way to slow the Indian population juggernaut to raise living standards and average income.

Yup! Urbanization is the only way.

 

[Nahraf]

I think you're overestimating Chinese government's power to control. The day they decide to cut benefits to minimal is the day they'll be overthrown.

You can cut the seniors benefits by raising the retirement age and not indexing the benefits with inflation. The retirement in Canada is 65 and if they raise it to 70 then then they can save 5 years worth of benefits. In Canada seniors usually get $1000 per month in benefits. If the government freeze the rate then after 10 years the $1000 will only buy less than half what it buys now.